John Donohue = Objectivist crusading against all Blasphemers of his Personal LORD and Savior. I've seen this dynamic before -- in Fundamentalist Christians and Communists. The dynamics are the same; only the object of worship is different.

I don't think anyone was really trying to say that it was unbiased, but rather that it was a more sensitive treatment of a woman who was more complex than the caricature she's become (history, unfortunately, has a way of making complex characters rather two-dimensional. Time is unkind to all). It points out her flaws, but at the same time, it doesn't resoundingly condemn her for them. I found it to be a very human portrait of a very influential person.

Actually, this comic is very careful to consist largely of flat statements of historical fact with as little editorialising as possible and a deliberately simple style of artwork that illustrates but doesn't lead. It's obviously biased, because it's made by someone who doesn't like her, but it clearly tries to play fair. It lets Rand condemn herself for the most part. As you can clearly tell, since you haven't given example one of commentary, spin, slant cherry picking. Accusations are not proof.

I gave one very specific case of omission, posted below on this page. The slants, spins and commentary are so obvious only a person in denial could miss them.

The "simple" illustrations are also propaganda. Another artist could easily make a comic with a simple style but flattering and beautiful to Ayn Rand. That artist could have also posted dozens of pages of positive, uplifting incidents which Cunningham chose to omit.

The worse sin is the psychologizing, which I have pointed out on several pages.

The two books I've referenced the most are Anne C. Heller's Ayn Rand And The World She Made, and Jennifer Burn's Goddess OF The Market: Ayn Rand And The American Right. Both are excellent. Heller's biography is better on Rand's early life, while Burn's cover's Rand's huge influence on libertarian politics.

Because Burns asserts that Rand's was the product of her upbringing, environment, and interactions? Are you saying that Rand is the first human being to develop completely independently of these factors and that her ideas were formed in some kind of vacuum?

Agreeing with gnarg that those two bios are full of speculation, spin, opinion and psychologizing.

Meanwhile, no one is free from the impact of influences of one's upbringing and culture. However, we are all responsible for examining these deeply, then accepting or rejecting the influences based on chosen values. That process is know as "an examined life" and also "growing up" as an individual.

Burns and Heller throw around a lot of psychologizing. One must ask, how did they chose the particular details with which to impute Ayn Rand's character? Did they omit any? Did they somehow measure the impact, as a doctor would? Did they have inside knowledge of Ayn Rand's examination of her own life?

Worship requires adoration of someone residing in the supernatural realm and no one is sure if Ayn Rand is in heaven or not. So, no on the worship.

Second, although they can all be considered "inaccuracies," I cited 'speculation, spin, opinion and psychologizing' which are much worse than errors of small facts, etc.

Third, here is a prime example (one of scores) of a Jennifer Burns massive error: Ayn Rand's condemnation of altruism is not only absolutely critical to her moral philosophy, but also pivots significantly around Burn's purported thesis: Ayn Rand's influence on the "American Right." Not only does Burns not sufficiently paint a fair representation of Rand's position, she opines that it is insipid, not likely to provoke dissent and unoriginal!

So that is a sin of omission, failure of mission, unwarranted opinion and laziness. Slightly more egregious than an "inaccuracy."

1) please link to a video with the "billions" in it, I have not seen it.

2) I have seen comments where he theoretically stated that perhaps the only way of deterring Muslim state-sponsored attacks on our country was to kill a hundred thousand believers. It was a thought experiment calculated to blow up the seriousness of the problem, not a driven policy target.

3) I do not agree with Mr. Brook on this. The only way to end religion is to figure out how to shatter the practice of adults indoctrinating children.

"Because Burns asserts that Rand's was the product of her upbringing, environment, and interactions? Are you saying that Rand is the first human being to develop completely independently of these factors and that her ideas were formed in some kind of vacuum?" -- Bear

"The only way to end religion is to figure out how to shatter the practice of adults indoctrinating children."

Well, one way that seems to work is having a large, active government, public education, healthcare and a strong welfare state - providing the kind of security for which people might otherwise turn to a deity and/or their church community.

I don't know much about you, John Donohue, but my gut says you'd get right behind that.

Meanwhile, this is an interesting point, not pertinent to this blog, however. How can humanity shatter the practice of adults indoctrinating children into religion, and I might add, all other irrational beliefs. The answer is not political collectivism, as per your hypothetical, both because two wrongs do not make a right, and because children's belief systems are NOT stamped by school; they are imbued by parents.

"Third, here is a prime example (one of scores) of a Jennifer Burns massive error: Ayn Rand's condemnation of altruism is not only absolutely critical to her moral philosophy, but also pivots significantly around Burn's purported thesis: Ayn Rand's influence on the 'American Right.' Not only does Burns not sufficiently paint a fair representation of Rand's position, she opines that it is insipid, not likely to provoke dissent and unoriginal!

So that is a sin of omission, failure of mission, unwarranted opinion and laziness. Slightly more egregious than an 'inaccuracy.'"

John Donohue, literally all of that is YOUR OPINION on what she wrote. You don't actually cite any quotes from her book, nor do you point out exactly how she got those things wrong. You just assert that she got it wrong without evidence. In other words, you've constructed a poor argument. Until you provide some actual evidence to back up your opinion, I have no reason to believe that what you said is any way, shape, or form accurate.

Give us more! There is little in the way of truth about Rand because she has become the poster child of powerful forces in America. The one and only serious attempt to dissect her 'philosophy' was William F. O'Neill's, WITH CHARITY TOWARD NONE: An Analysis of Ayn Rand's Philosophy, (1972). Also the much more recent GODDESS OF THE MARKET and AYN RAND and the WORLD SHE MADE.

This is the first time I read any details about Ayn Rand's childhood in Russia. I DID know she fled Lenin and flipped one-eighty into a funhouse mirror reflection of the Bolsheviki, with a Cosmic-level Philosophy of Utter Selfishness instead of Insect-Hive Collectivism.

Given what happened to her during her formative years -- psychologically abusive mother plus First Russian Revolution and Russian Civil War -- no wonder she grew into such a Control Freak. Always had to be in total control, so nobody could ever hurt her like that again.

I have long maintained that Ayn Rand was a funhouse mirror reflection of Josef Stalin. And that if she'd been given the same absolute power of life-or-death over a country like Stalin, her Objectivist regime would have been just as bloody and inhuman as Stalin's Communist regime. The only difference would have been the One True Pure Ideology.

In the Eighties small-press B&W comic <I>Fission Chicken</I>, she became a chain-smoking undead cyborg, leading an invasion of Deros up from the Hollow Earth. (Objectivism + Shaver Mystery = Weird...) I don't remember how Fission Chicken defeated her, but it probably involved his trademark deadpan absurdity.

And if you ever wondered about what Ayn Rand would be like as a My Little Pony villain, wonder no more. <a href="http://www.fimfiction.net/story/5172/5/the-bad-apple-chronicles/apple-shrugged">Just click this link and join one Bad Apple, Earth Pony ex-swindler, ex-Maresippi Riverboat gambler, and undercover agent for the Equestrian Crown as he infiltrates Vault's Vale in "Apple Shrugged".</a> "A = A! Objective Equine Truth!"

What gets me is how she's become the Fourth Person of the Trinity to a lot of politically-active Christianese types, and Atlas Shrugged the 67th book of the Bible.

Back when the economy tanked in 2007, I read of claims that "This was All Prophesied in Atlas Shrugged", literally citing chapter and verse.

And after the 2008 elections put Barack Obama into the Presidency, we had John Galt Celebrity Impersonators coming out of the woodwork for Ron Paul! Ron Paul! Ron Paul!

"Who is John Galt?" I don't know, but after November 2008 the guy's got more Celebrity Impersonators than Elvis.

Actually, I do. He's an Objectivist Jesus Christ (in the Apocalyptic role); at it's core, "Atlas Shrugged" is the same story as "Left Behind", just pitched to fanservice different audiences. Take too long to go into here, but Darryl? If you can get my email from these postings, contact me privately and I can tell you at greater length how "Atlas Shrugged" is "Left Behind" for Objectivists. (Or should that be "Left Behind" is "Atlas Shrugged" for Dispensationalist Christians?)

Though Cunningham didn't mention Rand going all Harley Quinn over a serial child-killer in California circa 1928. Bella & EDWARD all the way (sparkle sparkle); just search for "Ayn Rand Serial Killer" or "Ayn Rand William Hickman" and references should come up.

Is Ayn Rand a visionary genius, vilified by the left-wingers, or is she a crazy psycho narcissist with no empathy and compassion worshiped by right-wingers?

Her exact moral and ethical opposite is Michael David Crawford who hangs out on Kuro5hin when he is not in jail or a mental hospital. He is a visionary left-wing genius who write these 100,000 word essay manifestos on the Internet http://www.warplife.com/ for more info. If you hate Ayn Rand you will love Mike Crawford, and if you hate Mike Crawford you will love Ayn Rand. Crawford is a communard who believes in altruism and a card carrying liberal democrat.

Ayn Rand was ugly in spirit and body; she was a psychopath that not only admired a sadistic serial killer who dismembered little girls but openly declared it too.
To praise one who views concern for others as a pathology, is to promote a disdain for our fellow man in our society.
Ayn Rand was raised a spoiled Russian brat with servants, only to migrate to America and enjoy a cushy life there too; she offered nothing to the advancement of "humanity" and only served to entrench an attitude of self interest to the denial of harmony between people.
In short, she was a sick and ugly misanthrope.
read all about it....
http://exiledonline.com/atlas-shrieked-why-ayn-rands-right-wing-followers-are-scarier-than-the-manson-family-and-the-gruesome-story-of-the-serial-killer-who-stole-ayn-rands-heart/

Just writing to say great work! I recognized some of the statements given as found in interview footage from Adam Curtis's "All Watched Over by Machines of Loving Grace".

I was wondering if you might consider doing a similar comic on the little known manifest drama, contradictions, and absurdity in the personal lives of Karl Marx and/or Che Guevara? Both of whom are figures who also enjoy a massively popular cult worshiping and idealizing far beyond the quality and character of their person or writing.